EPCSOFTWARES
Search/

Versus

M4 PLANT vs AVEVA E3D Design

Put any two products side by side: specification, the six criteria and the EPC Index needle.

FIG. 049

M4 PLANT

CAD Schroer · 3D Plant Design

02040608010061EPC INDEX

A pragmatic plant and factory design package for smaller projects, with a regional user base. Few large EPCs standardise on it.

FIG. 012

AVEVA E3D Design

AVEVA · 3D Plant Design

02040608010082EPC INDEX

The reference choice for large multidiscipline plant and offshore projects, especially where the owner already runs AVEVA. Its strength is scale and maturity rather than ease of entry.

  1. 7Capability25%9
  2. 6Interoperability20%7
  3. 6Scale15%10
  4. 7Usability15%6
  5. 6Deployment10%8
  6. 4Ecosystem15%9
AttributeM4 PLANTAVEVA E3D Design
VendorCAD SchroerAVEVA
Category3D Plant Design3D Plant Design
StatusActiveActive
DeploymentDesktopDesktop · Cloud
LicensingCommercial licenceSubscription
Standardsn/an/a
Strengths
  • Combined factory layout and plant design
  • Modular packages
  • Practical for smaller teams
  • Proven on very large, multi-site projects
  • Tight integration with AVEVA schematics, E&I and engineering data
  • Large global talent and partner pool
Considerations
  • Small international talent pool
  • Limited public detail on interoperability
  • Rarely specified by large owners
  • Steep learning curve and catalogue administration effort
  • Most value is realised inside the AVEVA ecosystem
  • Subscription credits need active management

§ 02

Popular match-ups

The two leading products in each category, ready to compare.